This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:10:49AM -0500, Daniel Reed wrote:
>On 2004-01-19T00:33-0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>) On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 10:11:27PM -0500, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>) >Well, as much as I'd like to see gtypist get out the door, there is one
>) >technicality: it requires the help2man package (whose ITP is still
>) >pending with 2 votes) in order to build.
>) I'll vote for help2man, if it helps.
>The help2man package is now only missing a "good to go" review.
>I am going to try to make a dent in the backlog of all-but-reviewed packages
>sometime this week. However, anyone who would like to see their favorite
>proposed packages uploaded can feel free to install the package, do some
>sanity checks on the packaging and basic functionality, and try to build the
>package from its source package.
>Any reported problems will be held against the package until its proposer
>announces a fix (or just says the problems are insignificant; I will
>typically trust their judgment). A review including the phrase "good to go"
>will remove the last major obstacle to uploading. Once a package has one
>"good to go", three votes, and no problems, I will perform a last set of
>sanity checks and upload it.
Can we implement a time limit on packages for which feedback has been solicted
but for which none is forthcoming? I'd like to start talking about a rule
like "If a package review notes a problem and no feedback from the package
owner shows up for two weeks, the package will be removed from consideration".